The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-11-13
A NEW LEGAL PROBLEM.
THE CRIMINAL COURT JUDGE SUR
PRIsED AND sTUMPED.
A Subpoena Issued for Wharfmaster
Kallaher Provokes Learned and
Stubborn Battle Between Opposing
Lawyers.

Kallaher Provokes a Learned and
Stubborn Battle Between Opposing
Lawyers.
A legal proposition arose in the criminal
court Yesterday which stumpcd his honor,
who reserved decision until Monday morn
ing. In brief it was: Thatthc grand jury
had no legal right TO send for Mr. Kalla-
hers books, or any one clsc's, for that
matter, as II would be virtually testilying
against himself This was particularly the
case with their client, whose Office was not
designated along with those liable. The
only thing the grand jury could do was to
visit an officials office and examine any
book they might find there, but should the
said official be- around the corner with
more books under his coat which he re-
fused Ia submit for examination that set
tied il. This was in effect what had re-
suited in kallahcr's case, Therefore there
was no further use in sending for his books.
The situation was created by the appear
ancc OF subpoena for Kallahcr, issued To
compel him Ia turn over his books 10 the
grand Jury. Col CAN'T moved Ia quash
the subpoena, and took the position that
the grand jury had the right to go and cX-
anime the accounts Of public officers, but
not 10 order the books Of said officer
brought To them. lie argued that his
client could not bcrcquircd toOrally testify
IN his cnsc, having been indicted, and that
the limits which cuniinc oral testimony
apply 10 manuscript testimony. Again, II
the intention was 10 secure eliminating
evidence from Kallnhcrs books he could
refuse 10 turn them over on the ground
that a defendant j. not required Ia crimi-
nate himself, The prosecution could get
all the information they have right To,
but not by the subpoena method.
Gen. Peters Wen Withdraw the pro-
cccdngs il you'll tell Ms how We can get at
| those books.
Col. CAN'T repeated his statement that
the law permitted the grand jury TO 90 TO
| the defendants office and examine the
| books, but in ease they could not bc found,
| there was no law empowering II Ia 90 and
| look for the officer. lie said that kallahcr
had no Office 10y law, and possibly lac had
no books.
The court suggested that IL kallahcr
would answer the subpoena. Though kal-
| lahcr had no room for an office possibly
| he had an Office, and was presumed Ia
have books, which the grand jur! must
| have access 10.
Col. CAN'T answered thatkallahcr could
not be- required 10 produce his books. II
the grand jury wanted them il was their
| business Ia find them; failing IN which
Al
the books. II might be- possible that the
books would criminatc Kalahcr, in which
ease he could not DC compelled TO submit
them.
Col. VIM. Carroll followed with an ar
gumont supporting the position taken 10y
Col CAN'T lie said that iurty-ninc in
kdicimcnls had already been found against
knllahcr on evidence furnished 10y him
self lie read q letter from W. II. Nell
sou, foreman oi the grand jury, dated De-
tohcr -, 1887, asking for the books uf the
Wharimuacrs office nom 1879 Ia 1883, and
other papers explanatory OF the books
already IN the hands ol the grand jury.
Col, tnrrull argued ably that kallahcr
could not IN law or justice he compelled
to give up his books Ca the grand jury.
Cen. Peters said that lac hid no desire
]
| had been large amount 81 sloalago. hut
/ he Wls not prepared tO say who did H.
| The books were either in existence or out
oi existence, and hc only asked that Mr.
| knllhhrr submit them, refuse tO do 10, OF
10 state whether or not he has Kept any
books
lie simply asked that the grand Jury BE-
allowed Ia examine them. and " they
"A. l. oil a.
| The intention ol the grand jury was tu In.
ycsiigatr the Office thoroughly us 1t l.
| their duty Ia do.
Gcn. rclcrs urged that Eallahcr was III
| the position NJ tax cnlh5tor Who refuse,
! tn allow his books Ia hc examined fOr ical
/ that tie examination migiil w. detrimental
| g. him. kalluhcr j. u taNHcollcrtur lust u.
| IN County Trustee Andrew Harris, an,
| that his books uuu ~ open to the grand
! Jury as those NJ the county trustee ten
/ F,lcu said that the facts Were az follows
/ The grand Jury asked kallahcr lea vi,
books. md he iniimatrd that hc was NOT
| required tp keep books. lie then referred
| them ~ his deputy. who Reformed them
| back Ia kulllhrr. who turned over th,
/ backs from 1851. The books prior iu isS'
had been asked Tor hut not turned over
/
court Ia invoke the law to iorc kallahri
10 allow the grand jury 10 examine hi.
/ hnuks.
Grn Wright asked permission Ia make
a brief argument, which was granted. lie
said that the question iur the court 10 ic.
| eide WIS whether the grand jury has tho
right to issue subpoena demanding TINT
/ kuluhcr come briurU them with hishupks.
Tie argued that the grand jury had ~ such
/ right, and HAT the subpoena was In excess
ol the gund jury's authority lie further
/ argued, that even Conccding this position
/ tu hc unlcnahlc knllahcr could not bc
/ iurccd Ia furnished dOCumcntaf, evidence
which might be- used against him.
After Gen. Wrigh, tonclnl;,, Iudw,
Dnp,,-c said he would investigate the law
on the question; that he WIS determined
that the grand jury should be- given an on.
puHuniiy to examine the books. bat that
hc wished II done according Ia law, anl II
the subpoena wouldn't hold he would take